logo
Bill forcing schools to share property taxes with charters passes. But 40% of senators voted no

Bill forcing schools to share property taxes with charters passes. But 40% of senators voted no

Yahoo21-02-2025

A controversial bill forcing traditional public schools to share property tax revenue with charter schools passed the Senate Thursday, splitting the chamber's Republicans after hours of contentious debate.
Senate Bill 518 passed the Senate by a 28-21 vote, with 12 Republicans joining nine Democrats to vote against it over concerns that it would dilute funding for traditional public schools. The bill will now move to the House in the second half of the legislative session where it will face another round of committee hearings, amendments and votes.
The somewhat narrow vote margin signals it could face an uphill battle on its way to becoming law. The Senate passed the bill on Thursday after nearly two hours of discussion that sometimes was tense.
Opponents of the bill have raised alarms that public school districts across the state will be harmed by the bill, some to the tune of millions of dollars. Indianapolis Public Schools, for example, has said that it could be forced to close 20 schools and lay off staff. A fiscal analysis of the legislation predicts public schools could have to divert $10.4 million to charter schools in 2028.
Sen. Fady Qaddoura, D-Indianapolis, said Republicans in the Senate have "drilled into our minds" recently that lawmakers need to be fiscally responsible due to a tight budget year.
"If this body is truly about choice, then why (does) choice have to come at the expense of the choice of a million people going to traditional schools? Can choice only be accepted if it's at the expense of somebody else?" Qaddoura said.
But the bill has been supported by many Indiana charter schools and school choice proponents who argue that parents who send their kids to charter schools deserve to benefit from their property tax dollars.
The bill's author, Sen. Linda Rogers, R-Granger, said public tax dollars "should be following the child" regardless of whether they go to traditional public or charter schools. It's the same principle Republican leaders have preached when it comes to how to divvy state dollars for education, too.
"We need to also think about the parents that are choosing to send their child to a different school, to a charter school," Rogers said. "Those tax dollars, for years, have not followed their children. Today we need to make that change."
Sen. Chris Garten, R-Charlestown, added that districts like IPS shouldn't retain 100% of property tax revenue when so many kids who live in the district are choosing to attend charter schools instead.
"When we talk about equity in education funding, ask yourself this, 'Is that equitable?'" Garton said. "Why do those kids matter less in the education system? Why should we fund those kids less? Because that's the system currently."
Democrats in the Senate, who have just 10 seats out of 40, tried to change the bill earlier this week but all of their 18 proposed amendments failed to pass muster with Republicans. The only amendment that was approved this week was a Republican proposal to delay the bill's implementation until 2028.
Still, the vote on the bill Thursday split Republicans, too.
Sen. Mike Bohacek, R-Michiana Shores, said charter schools that don't provide bus service shouldn't get property tax dollars, which are supposed to, in part, fund transportation. That money should be returned to taxpayers instead, he said.
"If they're not providing the service, they don't have the liability," Bohacek said. "Why are we giving them 100% of the levy if we know that half of that is for bus service?"
Sen. Jean Leising, R-Oldenburg, had a different reason for opposing the bill: the one charter school in her district isn't included. The bill only applies to districts that sends 100 or more kids to charter schools.
"They really don't understand why they can't be included because their students come from seven different public school (districts)," Leising said. "They cannot participate in this program."
There's a philosophical difference at play in the debate. While opponents said public school districts would lose money, supporters said those districts shouldn't be getting that revenue in the first place.
Sen. Shelli Yoder, D-Bloomington, said on Thursday that she was opposed to the bill because it dilutes public education funding, and public schools educate the vast majority of Indiana kids.
Yoder said the state should fund charter schools in their "own right, without raiding the public property tax dollars."
Rogers, on the other hand, said those traditional public schools are "receiving money for students they are not educating."
Senate President Pro Tempore Rodric Bray said he wasn't surprised to see that several members of his caucus voted against the proposal.
There's a lot of uncertainty right now about property taxes given the tax relief measures in Senate Bill 1, which would also impact schools, he said.
"It's a contentious issue, so I didn't expect it to be 100% at all," Bray said. "We just have to make sure that what we do there is good policy but that does bring some trepidation to some of the members I think."
Contact IndyStar state government and politics reporter Brittany Carloni at brittany.carloni@indystar.com. Follow her on Twitter/X @CarloniBrittany.
Contact senior government accountability reporter Hayleigh Colombo at hcolombo@indystar.com. Follow her on Twitter/X @hayleighcolombo.
This article originally appeared on Indianapolis Star: Bill to share property tax money with charters passes Senate

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

In their own words: Trump, Newsom trade insults and barbs over National Guard in Los Angeles

time13 minutes ago

In their own words: Trump, Newsom trade insults and barbs over National Guard in Los Angeles

The swiftly evolving situation in the Los Angeles area over protests surrounding immigration enforcement actions has also cued up a public spat between President Donald Trump and Gov. Gavin Newsom, the California governor who has been one of the Republican president's most vocal Democratic critics. After Trump on Sunday called up 2,000 National Guard troops to respond, Newsom said he would sue the administration, a promise on which the state followed through a day later. Trump cited a legal provision that allows him to mobilize federal service members when there is 'a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States." The president also agreed with one of his top advisers that maybe the governor should be arrested. Here's a look at back-and-forth between Trump and Newsom in their own words: 'You have violent people, and we're not gonna let them get away with it.' — Trump, Sunday, in remarks to reporters in Morristown, New Jersey. ___ Newsom's ire has been elevated over Trump's decision to, without his support, call up the California National Guard for deployment into his state. In a letter Sunday, Newsom called on Trump to rescind the Guard deployment, calling it a 'serious breach of state sovereignty.' The governor, who was in Los Angeles meeting with local law enforcement and other officials, also told protesters they were playing into Trump's plans and would face arrest for violence or property destruction. 'Trump wants chaos and he's instigated violence,' he said. 'Stay peaceful. Stay focused. Don't give him the excuse he's looking for.' In an interview with MSNBC, Newsom said Sunday he had spoken with Trump 'late Friday night,' after the protests had begun, but said deploying the National Guard 'never came up.' "We talked for almost 20 minutes, and he — barely, this issue never came up. I mean, I kept trying to talk about LA, he wanted to talk about all these other issues," Newsom said. 'We had a very decent conversation.' 'He never once brought up the National Guard,' Newsom said of Trump, calling him 'a stone-cold liar.' Saying, 'I did call him the other night,' Trump told reporters Sunday that he told Newsom in that call: ''Look you've got to take care of this. Otherwise I'm sending in the troops.' ... That's what we did.' On Monday, Trump posted on social media that Los Angeles would have been 'completely obliterated' without his intervention and referred to Newsom as 'Newscum,' a pejorative moniker he has used to refer to the governor. 'We are suing Donald Trump. This is a manufactured crisis. He is creating fear and terror to take over a state militia and violate the U.S. constitution.' — Newsom, Monday, X post. ___ As Newsom promised, California officials sued the Trump administration on Monday, with the state's attorney general, Rob Bonta, arguing that the deployment of troops 'trampled' on the state's sovereignty and pushing for a restraining order. The initial deployment of 300 National Guard troops was expected to quickly expand to the full 2,000 that were authorized by Trump. Late Monday, Trump authorized an additional 2,000 National Guard troops. Ahead of that move, Newsom accused the president of inflaming tensions, breaching state sovereignty and wasting resources, while warning protesters not to 'take Trump's bait.' Teasing the suit, Newsom told MSNBC that he saw the deployment as 'an illegal act, an immoral act, an unconstitutional act.' Asked Monday about the lawsuit, Trump said it was 'interesting' and argued 'that place would be burning down' without the federal government's intervention. 'I'm very happy I got involved," Trump added. "I think Gavin in his own way is very happy I got involved.' 'I think it's great. Gavin likes the publicity, but I think it would be a great thing." — Trump, Monday, in remarks to reporters. ___ Tom Homan, the Trump administration's border czar, previously warned that anyone, including public officials, would be arrested if they obstructed federal immigration enforcement. Newsom's initial response to Homan, during the MSNBC interview and in subsequent posts on his own social media: 'Come and get me, tough guy.' On Monday Trump seemed to agree with his border chief, telling reporters, 'I would do it if I were Tom.' 'I think it's great. Gavin likes the publicity, but I think it would be a great thing,' Trump added. "He's done a terrible job. Look — I like Gavin, he's a nice guy, but he's grossly incompetent, everybody knows." Homan later said there was 'no discussion' about actually arresting Newsom, but reiterated that 'no one's above the law.' wrote Monday on X that they represented 'a day I hoped I would never see in America' and said Trump's call for his arrest marked 'an unmistakable step toward authoritarianism.'

World Cup host city organizers acknowledge immigration crackdown may impact next year's tournament

time13 minutes ago

World Cup host city organizers acknowledge immigration crackdown may impact next year's tournament

NEW YORK -- Philadelphia's host city executive for the 2026 World Cup says organizers accept that an immigration crackdown by President Donald Trump's administration may be among the outside events that impact next year's tournament. "There are certainly things that are happening at the national level, the international level, there are going to be geopolitical issues that we don't even know right now that are going affect the tournament next year, so we recognize that we're planning within uncertainty,' Meg Kane said Monday at a gathering of the 11 U.S. host city leaders, one year and two days ahead of the tournament opener. The World Cup will be played at 16 stadiums in the U.S., Mexico and Canada from June 11 to July 19 next year, a tournament expanded to 48 nations and 104 games. All matches from the quarterfinals on will be in the U.S., with the final at MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey. 'Whether it's the Olympics, whether it's a World Cup, whether it's a Super Bowl, you name it, anytime you've got a major international sporting event, geopolitics is going to have a role,' said Alex Vasry, CEO of the New York/New Jersey host committee. Kane said the host committees must adapt to decisions made by others. 'One of the things that I think we all recognize is that we have to be really good at operating within that uncertainty,' Kane said. 'I think for each of our cities, we want to be prepared to make any person that is coming and makes the decision to come to the United States or come to this World Cup feel that they are welcome. We do not play a role necessarily in what is happening in terms of the decisions that are made.' Trump's travel ban on citizens from 12 countries exempted athletes, coaches, staff and relatives while not mentioning fans. 'We allow for FIFA to continue having constructive conversations with the administrations around visas, around workforce, around tourism,' Kane said. FIFA is running the World Cup for the first time without a local organizing committee in the host nation. Asked in late April whether FIFA president Gianni Infantino was available to discuss the tournament, FIFA director of media relations Bryan Swanson forwarded the request to a member of the media relations staff, who did not make Infantino available. Legislation approved by the House of Representatives and awaiting action in the Senate would appropriate $625 million to the Federal Emergency Management Agency 'for security, planning, and other costs related to the 2026 FIFA World Cup.' The 11 U.S. host committees have been consulting with each other on issues such as transportation for teams and VIPs, and for arranging fan fests. At the last major soccer tournament in the U.S., the 2024 Copa America final at Hard Rock Stadium in Miami Gardens, Florida, started 82 minutes late after fans breached security gates. 'Certainly we were not involved in the planning or the logistics for that particular match,' said Alina Hudak, CEO of the Miami World Cup host committee. She said local police 'have done an extensive review of the after-action reports related to that in collaboration with the stadium and so all of the things that happened are in fact being reviewed and addressed and I can assure you that everything is being done within our power to make sure that the appropriate measures are being placed, the appropriate perimeters.'

GOP Rep Announces Sudden Retirement in Shock Twist for GOP Majority
GOP Rep Announces Sudden Retirement in Shock Twist for GOP Majority

Yahoo

time25 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

GOP Rep Announces Sudden Retirement in Shock Twist for GOP Majority

Tennessee Rep. Mark Green announced his sudden retirement Monday before the end of his term, leaving Republicans with a slender majority. Green, the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, revealed that he would be moving into the private sector once the House votes on any Senate changes to Donald Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill.' The initial legislation squeaked by in the House last month, 215 to 214. 'Recently, I was offered an opportunity in the private sector that was too exciting to pass up,' he said in a statement. Green didn't elaborate on the role, and his office didn't immediately return a request for comment from the Daily Beast. Upon Green's exit from the House, the GOP's majority will shrink to seven—219 to 212. A special primary election will take place within two months from that date, with a general election to follow a few weeks later. Green's seat—Tennessee's 7th congressional district—is reliably red, having been in Republican hands since 1983. A former Army flight surgeon in Afghanistan and Iraq who interviewed Saddam Hussein during Operation Red Dawn, Green later founded a staffing company for hospitals' emergency departments. He also launched two medical clinics in Tennessee and 'numerous' medical mission trips, his website states. Green was elected to the Tennessee state senate in 2012. He briefly ran for governor in 2018, but later launched a bid instead for his current seat when then-Rep. Marsha Blackburn announced her run for Senate. In February 2024, Green announced he would retire from Congress, but changed his mind two weeks later after Donald Trump said he would endorse him if he ran for reelection. That summer, Green drew attention over personal matters. While in the process of getting divorced, Green's then-wife accused him of having an affair. In a statement acknowledging a 'difficult time for my family and me,' Green didn't deny the claim, which the woman in question confirmed to Politico after Green's wife initially identified the wrong woman. 'We are currently going through divorce proceedings,' Green said then. 'As this is a deeply private matter, I ask for privacy. I will continue to serve this district with all I've got, as I have the last five and a half years.' Green's daughter, Catherine, subsequently told the Nashville Banner that he had not been living up to his public image. 'My dad sells himself in politics as being a Christian, conservative family man,' she said. 'His actions in the last, whatever, year have not been that.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store